ヘンリー王子の警護レベル引き下げは合法　英高等法院

【ロンドンＡＦＰ＝時事】英ロンドンの高等法院は２８日、王室を離脱し米国で暮らすヘンリー王子に対する英訪問時の警護レベルを政府が引き下げことをめぐり、合法との判断を示した。王子側は上訴する方針を表明した。（写真はヘンリー英王子）
　王子は王室離脱後、妻メーガン妃と共に２０２０年１月に北米に移住。政府はそれを受け同年２月、王子に対し、警護レベルの引き下げを通告した。王子はこれを不服として提訴していた。
　高等法院はこの日、内務省の委託を受けた委員会が策定した王子への対応は「これまでも、また現在においても法的に妥当」と判断した。
　これを受け王子のスポークスマンは、「正義を手にするため」王子は控訴院に上訴する意向だと述べた。「王子は特別待遇を求めているわけではなく、規則の公正・合法的な適用を求めている」と説明した。
　王子は昨年１２月、高等法院での口頭弁論（書面）で、警護面での懸念から英国に戻れないと訴えていた。【翻訳編集ＡＦＰＢＢＮｅｗｓ】
〔ＡＦＰ＝時事〕（2024/02/29-16:47）

Prince Harry will seek to appeal a UK court ruling Wednesday that the government acted lawfully when it downgraded the level of his personal security when he visits Britain.
The youngest son of King Charles III launched the legal action after the British government told him in February 2020 that he would no longer be given the same degree of publicly-funded protection when in the UK.
Harry, the Duke of Sussex, sensationally relocated to North America in 2020 with his wife Meghan, eventually settling in California in the United States, and is no longer classified as a working royal.
High Court judge Peter Lane said in a 52-page judgement that the bespoke process devised for him by a committee which is under the remit of the interior ministry was, and is, legally sound.
But a legal spokesman for Harry said he will try to turn to the Court of Appeal to obtain justice. The court -- England's second highest -- must decide whether there are grounds to hear the case.
The duke is not asking for preferential treatment, but for a fair and lawful application of... (the) rules, ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others, Harry's spokesman added.
The interior ministry said it was pleased with the judgment and was carefully considering its next steps.
The UK government's protective security system is rigorous and proportionate, a ministry spokesperson added.
- 'Harm's way' -
The prince told a hearing at London's High Court in December that security concerns were preventing visits back to Britain.
The UK is my home. The UK is central to the heritage of my children, he said in a written statement read out by his lawyers.
That cannot happen if it's not possible to keep them safe.
I cannot put my wife in danger like that and, given my experiences in life, I am reluctant to unnecessarily put myself in harm's way too.
Harry's mother Princess Diana was killed in a high-speed car crash in Paris in 1997 as she tried to escape paparazzi photographers.
However, lawyers for the government rejected claims that he was singled out and treated less favourably or that a proper risk analysis was not carried out.
In May last year, a judge also sided with the government over its refusal to let him pay for specialist British police protection himself.
The interior ministry argued then that it was not appropriate for wealthy people to buy protective security when it had decided that it was not in the public interest for such taxpayer-funded protection.
London's Metropolitan Police also opposed Harry's offer on the grounds that it would be wrong to place officers in harm's way upon payment of a fee by a private individual.
- NY car chase -
The latest ruling also revealed new details about a New York car chase last May involving paparazzi that Harry and Meghan described as near catastrophic.
The New York Police Department (NYPD), the city's mayor and a taxi driver who briefly transported the couple all subsequently downplayed the danger and duration of the pursuit.
However, a December 2023 internal NYPD letter from its intelligence chief disclosed to the High Court said a thorough review of the incident had concluded that the behaviour in question was reckless.
Lane's ruling said the investigation had found reckless disregard of vehicle and traffic laws and persistently dangerous and unacceptable behaviour on the part of paparazzi during the night in question.
It also noted there was sufficient evidence to arrest two individuals for reckless endangerment.
The legal action over his personal security is one of various lawsuits Harry has pursued in recent years in Britain, primarily concerned with alleged phone hacking by newspapers.
Earlier this month, he settled a long-running legal claim against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN).
The prince is also bringing legal action against the publisher of the Daily Mail, while he and actor Hugh Grant are also suing News Group Newspapers (NGN), part of Rupert Murdoch's global media empire.